She did it...

[Amarillo]

My old friend, Helen Mountfield, has shown that the government's plan to exit the European Union is unlawful.

Perhaps now the pound will recover some of its value and any rises in the cost of the California will be slightly less severe.

A good day for democracy.

 

[T6 CFO]

Or perhaps we shall continue the in fighting rather than abiding by the referendum result and negotiating sensible terms with the EU.

A bad day for democracy.


Mike

 

[Amarillo]

Or perhaps we shall continue the in fighting rather than abiding by the referendum result and negotiating sensible terms with the EU.

A bad day for democracy.

I think that making sure that the Government acts in a lawful manner is important for democracy; I'm shocked that you appear to think otherwise.

 

[daveyboydanger]

Oh no. Isn't there already a fighty brexit thread?!

 

[Amarillo]

Oh no. Isn't there already a fighty brexit thread?!

This is intended to be about the effect of lawful Government policy on California prices.

 

[BerndRos]

OMG....these boys just won't let it rest, will they !

Ladies, imagine living with one of them !

 

[Hotel California]

Seems some have ambition in a carreer in plolitics.
Don't even care about politics in my own country so this kind of posts is usseles on a VW California forum like this.
Think we should start a new subcategory "politics" in where this sort post should go and those intrested go and nag as much as they want.
So that others can go on with positive posts.
@Martin , can we look in to this ?

 

[Martin]

We can always put some sub categories under open house chat? However the main reason for 'Open House Chat' is people who only want Cali Talk can choose to ignore this section ?

 

[johnv]

This is intended to be about the effect of lawful Government policy on California prices.

Course it is

 

[Hotel California]

We can always put some sub categories under open house chat? However the main reason for 'Open House Chat' is people who on want Cali Talk can choose to ignore this section ?

I agree , but this seems to be a thing the most on here don't like to see/read , looking at the reactions and just a few are bringing politics up again every other day.
If they are that clever , can't they see for themselfs they have not much to contribute with politic tinted posts on a VW forum?

 

[GrannyJen]

I'm happy to see it in open house.

By all means let it be discussed to the point of myopic tedious minutia.

All I ask is that respect is shown to each other and it does not descend into another point scoring, sneering, display of small minded personal antagonism.

 

[Teejay]

Oh no. Isn't there already a fighty brexit thread?!

More than one. Is there a way to ignore threads as opposed to a whole category or sub-categories?

 

[GrannyJen]

OMG....these boys just won't let it rest, will they !

Ladies, imagine living with one of them !

No. I cannot imagine ever living with one of them

Suitcase on the doorstep job after day 1

 

[GrannyJen]

An interesting constitutional occasion that we are now going through.

The 1688 (1689) Bill of rights makes it totally clear that no laws can be made or suspended without the approval of Parliament. Therefore the result of this challenge through the courts could be foreseen with crystal clarity even without the aid of mystic meg's crystal ball.

However both the restoration and the bill of rights also make clear the peoples treaty with parliament and the role of the monarch. This all stems from preventing the abuse of power exhibited by Oliver Cromwell.

We may now have one of the very, very few occasions when that appeal of the people against parliament may be heard.

The people have voted. If parliament votes against their wishes then the people have appeal over parliament to the Head of state who in this constitutional case is the formal representative of the people against parliament. The physical mechanism of this is by HM official opposition petitioning the monarch, normally to dissolve parliament forcing a general election and therefore returning power back to the people. We have to go back to 1974 I think when we last saw this, with the Harold Wilson government majority in the House of Commons being wiped out and having a government acting "in the minority". Australia and the dissolution of their parliament during the Gough Whitlam Debacle is another occasion.

So, to summarise a possible scenario: Parliament overturns Brexit. The people demand their voice be heard. Constitutionally their's is a right to petition the queen.

Will Corbyn, the leader of Her Majesty's opposition, a leader of a divided party, the most ineffectual leader of any interested organisation during the referendum run-up, really petition for a dissolution of parliament?

My suspicion is that Theresa May has foreseen this all along and is manoeuvring for her hand "to be forced." In seeking a general election to obtain a popular mandate for carrying through the referendum wishes she is in effect giving the electorate a second bite.

Either way the result will not be pretty.

 

[MattBW]

If you look at the original referendum bill it is totally clear that it was advisory only, MPs voting for the referedum doesn't mean they were voting for overriding the requirement for parliamentary approval later on.

If anything ensuring that Brexit goes through parliament means that any brexit deals are given proper scrutiny. It doesn't mean its not going to happen, it just means it will be robustly rebated before it does. People need to try and not see it as a barrier but as a means to improve the success and quality of brexit. Lastly If I am going to have Brexit imposed on me by those 52% of voters I still want my views considered in any deals made. This ensures it can happen in a quality way with a considered approach, not just leaping in with eyes closed as many today seem to want..

 

[Neilgbj]

Irrespective of whether this is good or bad for democracy it is a shame that our glorious written media has descended once again into hysteria, much of it extremely divisive.

Personally I think the decision of the courts is a positive one, checks and balances in the democratic process are essential, even if if it means the judiciary holding the executive to account. GJs points above are an informative summary and highlight the potential fun and games which will ensue over the coming months....deep joy.

Unfortunately it will of course end up in an unholy mess......hopefully this thread doesn't....

 

[T6 CFO]

Seems some have ambition in a carreer in plolitics.
Don't even care about politics in my own country so this kind of posts is usseles on a VW California forum like this.
Think we should start a new subcategory "politics" in where this sort post should go and those intrested go and nag as much as they want.
So that others can go on with positive posts.
@Martin , can we look in to this ?

I agree and I have kept silent on the subject despite it getting raised at every opportunity by the OP.

I do care about politics in my own country so eventually I am going to respond.


I'm fed up to the teeth of it so it's fine with me if it's banned.



Mike

 

[LowMan]

If you look at the original referendum bill it is totally clear that it was advisory only, MPs voting for the referedum doesn't mean they were voting for overriding the requirement for parliamentary approval later on.

If anything ensuring that Brexit goes through parliament means that any brexit deals are given proper scrutiny. It doesn't mean its not going to happen, it just means it will be robustly rebated before it does. People need to try and not see it as a barrier but as a means to improve the success and quality of brexit. Lastly If I am going to have Brexit imposed on me by those 52% of voters I still want my views considered in any deals made. This ensures it can happen in a quality way with a considered approach, not just leaping in with eyes closed as many today seem to want..

Was looking for the 100% Agree icon, but sadly couldn't find it....

 

[VW Cali]

Seems some have ambition in a carreer in plolitics.
Don't even care about politics in my own country so this kind of posts is usseles on a VW California forum like this.
Think we should start a new subcategory "politics" in where this sort post should go and those intrested go and nag as much as they want.
So that others can go on with positive posts.
@Martin , can we look in to this ?

Who here has ambition to be in politics?

I don't recall a single such statement or even hint.

But even if some do, much as I do not admire politicians in general, is that not a right of every citizen in every democratic country?

In North Korea, it may be an offence or looked down upon with repercussions - though I am not sure.

 

[Amarillo]

This thread has contained some thoughtful narrative on the position we find ourselves in, (albeit unrelated to the topic of California prices in light of the Court ruling). I am thinking in particular of GJ post #14, Matt's post #15 and Niel's post #16. However, I find it absolutely astonishing that the decision is being suggested as a political rather than legal decision:

I do care about politics in my own country so eventually I am going to respond.

a few are bringing politics up again every other day.

There is either a confusion between legal decisions and political decisions (understandable for those who might have English as a second language) or an accusation that Lord Chief Justice Lord Thomas's decision in the Royal Courts of Justice was political not legal. The latter is a very serious accusation indeed.

 

[Amarillo]

I agree and I have kept silent on the subject despite it getting raised at every opportunity by the OP.

Untrue.

If you are referring to the "Family of 10 turn down 5 bedroom house" thread, when someone tried to resurrect the thread I pointedly avoided getting drawn in. When someone posted provocatively, I led the way in what may very well be a record number of 'disagrees' without further comment.

If you are referring to the "Hold on to your wallets! T6 Camper £73.6k" thread, twice I tried to make a contribution about the possible benefits to the tourism industry of a weak pound, and how this opportunity is ruined by the continuing attacks on non-UK EU citizens by "thugs", I also conjectured that non-UK European California owners are deterred from visiting the UK for similar reasons. Twice my planned contributions were censored for no discernible reason.

I wouldn't for one moment claim to have kept quiet on the subject of Brexit, it is a very important subject which will effect all UK California owners for better or for worse. But it is quite untrue to claim I have "raised [the subject] at every opportunity". Indeed, I have tried to rationalise the subject.

 

[VW Cali]

I agree and I have kept silent on the subject despite it getting raised at every opportunity by the OP.

I do care about politics in my own country so eventually I am going to respond.


I'm fed up to the teeth of it so it's fine with me if it's banned.



Mike

In terms of the bold part of your post, you were first to respond to OP on this thread.

Second, italicized part, no one should tell you not to respond. Your right to an opinion is as important as anyone else's. And others have right to opinion too.

 

[VW Cali]

Untrue.

"Family of 10 turn down 5 bedroom house"

If you are referring to the "Hold on to your wallets! T6 Camper £73.6k" thread, twice I tried to make a contribution about the possible benefits to the tourism industry of a weak pound, and how this opportunity is ruined by the continuing attacks on non-UK EU citizens by "thugs", I also conjectured that non-UK European California owners are deterred from visiting the UK for similar reasons. Twice my planned contributions were censored for no discernible reason.

Brexit, it is a very important subject which will effect all UK California owners for better or for worse.

An observation:

1. Family of 10 turn down house is not very directly linked to California prices. Yet others started that thread and many were very worked up.

2. The second thread of VW California at 73.5k GBP is directly related to VW California prices obviously. It is also obviously linked to Sterling dumped after Brexit. Why would admins censor and delete posts on the topic? A lot has been kept here previously, with nane calling and direct insults both of members and others. I am surprised.

3. The 3rd thread on High Court ruling yesterday on Parliament having a say on Brexit is largely about politics but has a tenuous link to California prices as well. I mean sterling did rally. The link is more direct than in 1 above.

But the questions I have, in light of above:

A. Does general chat have to be linked to Californias? If so, why was 1 allowed?

And why are some posts being deleted and censored, and others not?

 

[Amarillo]

And why are some posts being deleted and censored, and others not?

As I have said elsewhere, censorship is a confusing beast. It is almost completely unavoidable for censors to detach themselves from their own prejudices. I know that I have a habit, which some find annoying, of picking up on details that others feel should be overlooked, e.g. political/legal confusion. I also feel that censors might give a certain leeway to long-time posters who often give invaluable technical advice, and this is understandable. It would be quite wrong to view this as victimisation of newer members. We all have our prejudices.

 

[VW Cali]

As I have said elsewhere, censorship is a confusing beast. It is almost completely unavoidable for censors to detach themselves from their own prejudices. I know that I have a habit, which some find annoying, of picking up on details that others feel should be overlooked, e.g. political/legal confusion. I also feel that censors might give a certain leeway to long-time posters who often give invaluable technical advice, and this is understandable. It would be quite wrong to view this as victimisation of newer members. We all have our prejudices.

Probably the most sensible post I have read on a web forum ever.

Just sums it up.

On different note:

(smiley quote begin)

In terms of technical advice, GranJen has said she doesn't give a sh1t about the science and maths of it, so technical advice will have to be non technical!

Plus she has also implied you, and others, have no chance with her so there! Admittedly somebody else instigated her into that statement.

GB has Mother Theresa, and we have GranJen. I know who I rate higher, and who I'd rather not cross.

(smiley quote end)